Fast Shadow
Mar 29, 10:46 AM
Anyone else think this is a little too public? And it's not a very comfortable place to sit having coffee�no matter how good the food is. I imagine a couple of billionaires could have found a more comfortable and more private place for coffee and a chat, unless they're being deliberately "public".
Is this how they squash a rumour in sily-con valley? Media says these two hate each other's guts. Be seen being nice to each other in public.
Of course.
Is this how they squash a rumour in sily-con valley? Media says these two hate each other's guts. Be seen being nice to each other in public.
Of course.
PeterKG
Mar 26, 05:43 PM
Steve's wardrobe:
http://www.stevesoutfit.com/
He needs to buy a longer inseam pair of Levi's. Maybe a 34", at least a 32".
http://www.stevesoutfit.com/
He needs to buy a longer inseam pair of Levi's. Maybe a 34", at least a 32".
Gasu E.
Mar 25, 09:20 AM
i bet they had people there with MBA's from good schools running financial what if's and telling management to avoid digital because they will make less money due to not selling the film or anything other than the camera
They did not avoid digital at all, in fact they were an early entrant to digital. The problem was that they were used to having a lucrative near-monopoly in film, a fat side business in film processing and a nice low-end camera business built around proprietary "connvenience" film packaging. They were now facing aggressive consumer electronics companies who were used to relently feature upgrades and short model lifecycles. Moreover, they could not rely on their film dominance to keep competitors at a disadvantage. In other words, they had to change their business model completely-- from near monopoly to completely competitive-- in order to success in the new business. Only a fraction of companies manage to do this successfully.
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
They did not avoid digital at all, in fact they were an early entrant to digital. The problem was that they were used to having a lucrative near-monopoly in film, a fat side business in film processing and a nice low-end camera business built around proprietary "connvenience" film packaging. They were now facing aggressive consumer electronics companies who were used to relently feature upgrades and short model lifecycles. Moreover, they could not rely on their film dominance to keep competitors at a disadvantage. In other words, they had to change their business model completely-- from near monopoly to completely competitive-- in order to success in the new business. Only a fraction of companies manage to do this successfully.
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
geekgirrl
Apr 22, 08:16 AM
There better be a bigger screen or I'm dumping Apple like a cold dirty ice cube and switching to android. It's basically an iphone, which is why Sammy is getting sued :)
completeidiot23
Dec 21, 06:09 AM
people are computers, they buy what is sold to them. if people are constantly being told that this music, is the new thing, then sooner or later they will buy it. rather then making music a personal choice, they buy what ever is on radio.
I like to make my music a personal thing, i go out and look for my music, not following what is told that great and hip.
I like to make my music a personal thing, i go out and look for my music, not following what is told that great and hip.
Bierkameel
Apr 23, 05:00 AM
€6,66 per gallon, nuff said.
That's 9,65$ per gallon.
That's 9,65$ per gallon.
Sky Blue
Mar 23, 03:58 PM
Might as well spend some of that bloated budget on something good.
coder12
Apr 25, 03:14 PM
Amazon is known to post a lot of wrong things in the past, (iWork '11 anyone?) but this seems pretty legit. I burned my install to a DVD to use it, and it worked just fine. I'd assume that this is the last upgrade on a DVD though. OTA upgrades FTW.
Chundles
Sep 27, 08:57 AM
Yep, sounds good. I likes me some OS updates.
Rack up another one (10.4.9) in December followed by another just before Leopard (10.4.10) and I reckon we'd be done.
Rack up another one (10.4.9) in December followed by another just before Leopard (10.4.10) and I reckon we'd be done.
TXCraig
Jun 11, 09:55 AM
T-Mobile is not exactly a financial beast either... Can they afford to give $400 subsidies on iPhones?
Most of T-Mobile is owned by Deutsche Telekom... they have very deep pockets...
Most of T-Mobile is owned by Deutsche Telekom... they have very deep pockets...
Thunderhawks
Mar 23, 02:16 PM
Since it was in beta testing forever, one would think it should have been working before it got released!
There, if you are waiting for it from FoW!
There, if you are waiting for it from FoW!
shelterpaw
Sep 1, 12:24 PM
Spending $400 on Vista Ultimate Edition makes up the difference. :) Although the operative phrase here is "most current OS running on their box"--the most current Windows is six years old, so if people want to complain that it costs more money to keep up with modern OS updates than it does to have no major OS updates at all for over half a decade, that's not exactly something I consider a negative. I've been using Vista pre-RC1 for a few days and besides some graphics updates it feels just like XP. The gadgets are not quite as nice as os x. Beyond that, Areo is super slow when you have several applications open and to run it you need 1 GB of ram or that's what they recommend. Vista is a resource hog. Don't get me wrong, it's a nice update, but it has a long way to go.
iZaid
Oct 27, 03:53 PM
Who got the sweets and cakes they passed around xD Nice of Apple. Shame they couldnt put barriers up :(
:rolleyes: i liked the flapjacks and the chocolate, coffee would have been nice.
apple didnt tell the council early enough, so they couldnt put up barriers.
where about in the line were you BTW :confused:
:rolleyes: i liked the flapjacks and the chocolate, coffee would have been nice.
apple didnt tell the council early enough, so they couldnt put up barriers.
where about in the line were you BTW :confused:
munkees
Mar 28, 01:38 PM
EF-s lenses produce smaller image circles. So they are lighter (and cheaper) than a comparable EF lens would be. That's it.
Note the focal length is always the focal length. A 50mm lens still has a 50mm focal length on a 1.6 crop camera. It has a different effective field of view, but that's not the same thing.
Also note this has been going on forever: a 50mm lens on a medium format camera (obviously with a bigger image circle) as a different field of view that it does on a "full frame" camera.
None of this is true. The focal length does not change. The effective field of view (once again not the same thing) of the 10-22 is the same as a 16-35.2mm lens would be on a full frame camera. If you use the 16-24mm lens on a crop camera it will not have the same effective field of view as the 10-22.
so I understand (sorry, my brain has been damaged), if the 16-24mm is used on a crop it would be 24 - 38. Canon made the 10-22 to give the crop people an equivalent lens like the 16-24 on the FF.
also the ef-s 18 - 55 would be like a 28 - 90mm on a FF.
OK this helps,
I trying to work out what lens I want to purchase, or whether to save my money, and just go FF, and stick with EF lens, just want to make wise investments.
Note the focal length is always the focal length. A 50mm lens still has a 50mm focal length on a 1.6 crop camera. It has a different effective field of view, but that's not the same thing.
Also note this has been going on forever: a 50mm lens on a medium format camera (obviously with a bigger image circle) as a different field of view that it does on a "full frame" camera.
None of this is true. The focal length does not change. The effective field of view (once again not the same thing) of the 10-22 is the same as a 16-35.2mm lens would be on a full frame camera. If you use the 16-24mm lens on a crop camera it will not have the same effective field of view as the 10-22.
so I understand (sorry, my brain has been damaged), if the 16-24mm is used on a crop it would be 24 - 38. Canon made the 10-22 to give the crop people an equivalent lens like the 16-24 on the FF.
also the ef-s 18 - 55 would be like a 28 - 90mm on a FF.
OK this helps,
I trying to work out what lens I want to purchase, or whether to save my money, and just go FF, and stick with EF lens, just want to make wise investments.
Apple OC
Apr 23, 12:39 AM
sure why not ... I also wanted Ross Perot to be President
CountSessine
Jun 17, 04:59 PM
AWS-1 (a.k.a. UMTS Band IV) is a standard in the U.S. and Canada. I think Japan has also allocated AWS-1 (to eMobile). It is constructed out of two parts: 1710 to 1755 MHz and 2110 to 2155 MHz. Devices which support AWS-1 are commonly labeled "1700." Quite simply, that's the spectrum that was available to put up for auction. T-Mobile and Wind Mobile either could bid on that spectrum and use it for 3G service or not. Mobile device manufacturers can now produce AWS frequency products if they want to sell through these carriers or not. It's Apple's choice whether to play or pass.
Years ago, European nations did not adopt the same frequency allocations that the U.S. did for the world's first cellular service (824-849 MHz paired with 869-894 MHz). It's hardly unusual that different groups of countries have different allocations, primarily because of existing services that were already licensed but also occasionally for political reasons.
There are all kinds of variations in spectrum allocations between countries and regions. The U.S. has allocated spectrum in the 700+ MHz range for LTE services (which Verizon in particular plans to use). Europe and Asia use 2100+ MHz for 3G while the U.S. doesn't. Europe has allocated 900+ MHz and 1800+ MHz spectrum to GSM (and now some 3G) while the U.S. has allocated the AMPS (824-849/869-894) and 1900+ MHz ranges. AWS-1 is just another set of frequencies which Apple either will or won't support.
If Apple does support AWS-1, it would significantly improve the compatibility of their products in North America. It isn't a particularly difficult engineering issue. (Fairly trivial, actually.) Nokia has already done so with the N8 which supports GSM/EDGE on 850/900/1800/1900 and 3G on 850/900/1700/1900/2100.
This is easily the most factually complete and correct post in this thread. Kudos!
I would add that most of the UMTS/HSPA carriers in north america are doing UMTS on the Cellular (850) and the PCS bands. Also, I'm not an EE, but I've always wondered why radio modems don't come with support for all of these bands. Why did/do we even have dual/tri-band GSM phones or HSPA phones that don't do AWS - especially now in 2010? Is it antenna design? Is it the extra analog front ends needed? Is it just product market segmentation?
Years ago, European nations did not adopt the same frequency allocations that the U.S. did for the world's first cellular service (824-849 MHz paired with 869-894 MHz). It's hardly unusual that different groups of countries have different allocations, primarily because of existing services that were already licensed but also occasionally for political reasons.
There are all kinds of variations in spectrum allocations between countries and regions. The U.S. has allocated spectrum in the 700+ MHz range for LTE services (which Verizon in particular plans to use). Europe and Asia use 2100+ MHz for 3G while the U.S. doesn't. Europe has allocated 900+ MHz and 1800+ MHz spectrum to GSM (and now some 3G) while the U.S. has allocated the AMPS (824-849/869-894) and 1900+ MHz ranges. AWS-1 is just another set of frequencies which Apple either will or won't support.
If Apple does support AWS-1, it would significantly improve the compatibility of their products in North America. It isn't a particularly difficult engineering issue. (Fairly trivial, actually.) Nokia has already done so with the N8 which supports GSM/EDGE on 850/900/1800/1900 and 3G on 850/900/1700/1900/2100.
This is easily the most factually complete and correct post in this thread. Kudos!
I would add that most of the UMTS/HSPA carriers in north america are doing UMTS on the Cellular (850) and the PCS bands. Also, I'm not an EE, but I've always wondered why radio modems don't come with support for all of these bands. Why did/do we even have dual/tri-band GSM phones or HSPA phones that don't do AWS - especially now in 2010? Is it antenna design? Is it the extra analog front ends needed? Is it just product market segmentation?
Applejuiced
Dec 27, 07:11 PM
That's beyond rediculous.
NYC is banned?
NYC is banned?
akhomerun
Oct 9, 04:54 PM
gee, the retail stores would speak out against something that would hurt their sales, wouldn't they?
apple is providing an alternative just like retail stores provided alternatives to going out to a theater when VHS was released. im certainly not saying it's better, i would never download an itunes movie, because i'd rather have a physical dvd. but now i have the choice.
apple is providing an alternative just like retail stores provided alternatives to going out to a theater when VHS was released. im certainly not saying it's better, i would never download an itunes movie, because i'd rather have a physical dvd. but now i have the choice.
atszyman
May 24, 01:26 PM
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR :mad: I'll get you!! BTW when are you planning on overtaking me, I have been waiting for three months or so...
End of June/early July. I've been lying low for the time being. Have to try to figure out who to taunt next. Maybe Rower_CPU? I should pass him sometime in 2009 at my current rate, which is due to fall since I have yet to complete a WU today.
Remember, set lofty goals so you always have a good excuse for failure.
End of June/early July. I've been lying low for the time being. Have to try to figure out who to taunt next. Maybe Rower_CPU? I should pass him sometime in 2009 at my current rate, which is due to fall since I have yet to complete a WU today.
Remember, set lofty goals so you always have a good excuse for failure.
alm99
Mar 24, 03:48 PM
What size is everyone getting? I will be picking up a 32gb since they are out of the 16gb.
MacRumors
Oct 9, 03:02 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Target has joined Wal-Mart (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2006-10-09T181443Z_01_N09273960_RTRUKOC_0_US-RETAIL-TARGET-LETTER.xml&WTmodLoc=InternetNewsHome_C2_internetNews-2) in cautioning major movie studies that digital movies could hurt retail DVD sales.
Target's letter from President Gregg Steinhafel noted that movie studio downloads were less expensive than DVDs, according to the newspaper. The letter also said that if the pricing did not become more equitable, Target would reconsider its investment in the DVD business, the paper said.
Wal-Mart was recently cited (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060922134714.shtml) as warning Movie Studios that there could be consequences if more movie studies joined in digital movie distribution alongside Disney.
Disney's Present of Home Entertainment has reportedly met with Target executives to stress that digital distribution remains a small market.
Target has joined Wal-Mart (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2006-10-09T181443Z_01_N09273960_RTRUKOC_0_US-RETAIL-TARGET-LETTER.xml&WTmodLoc=InternetNewsHome_C2_internetNews-2) in cautioning major movie studies that digital movies could hurt retail DVD sales.
Target's letter from President Gregg Steinhafel noted that movie studio downloads were less expensive than DVDs, according to the newspaper. The letter also said that if the pricing did not become more equitable, Target would reconsider its investment in the DVD business, the paper said.
Wal-Mart was recently cited (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060922134714.shtml) as warning Movie Studios that there could be consequences if more movie studies joined in digital movie distribution alongside Disney.
Disney's Present of Home Entertainment has reportedly met with Target executives to stress that digital distribution remains a small market.
torbjoern
Apr 28, 10:35 AM
In CT we are taxed I believe 50 cents on every gallon. The problem is that as gas prices rise people buy less of it and the taxes dry up.
3.00�3.50 USD per gallon (only in taxes!) would be more appropriate, don't you think? :D
No-one's going to tell me that petrol is expensive in the U.S.
3.00�3.50 USD per gallon (only in taxes!) would be more appropriate, don't you think? :D
No-one's going to tell me that petrol is expensive in the U.S.
Arcady
Apr 12, 01:01 PM
The correct link for the change notes for this release is here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2525412
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2525412
Zephi
Mar 21, 09:21 AM
Time to drag bicycle out of the garage, eh?
You know, the most ridiculous thing is when the Libya quarrel and everything ends I'm pretty certain the prices won't go down as much as they've gone up. We've seen this before.
You know, the most ridiculous thing is when the Libya quarrel and everything ends I'm pretty certain the prices won't go down as much as they've gone up. We've seen this before.
No comments:
Post a Comment